Comments by "ilr" (@iller3) on "Weak Bipartisan Gun Control Agreement Celebrated In Senate" video.

...I only ask, because it's the single biggest shift in our 'Rights' by Law tradition since the 1860's... and it's almost entirely Conservatives who made it possible
2
Cops will absolutely protect Gated Communities "with their lives." ...donuts don't control 100% of their livelihoods
2
@rogerstone481 These are all valid points too for a very very case-specific basis, but they don't in any way address the concern apoc5000 brought up with regards to "regulation" versus blanket-Bans. Ideally, counter-incentives are how we should be tackling most behaviors where one lone wolf individual feels backed into a corner. Anything else, is either a green light to try and accelerate a perceived "Sectarian-War", or worse, feeds the Reverse Psychology cycle to make someone even MORE nihilistic
2
So... when are we going do something about 'Citizen's United' then?? That single ruling took away pretty much ALL of our representation in our own governments and replaced 'free Speech' with energy-company and Tech Monopoly money drowning out the rights of everyone else who isn't an Oligarch
1
the *only* solution to the over-abundance of overly-lethal Firearms, is pouring real money into research for vastly more effective NON-lethal arms. We can't legislate our way out of this 'Despair Arc' our nation is in, but we COULD do a lot better than cardiac-arrest inducing Tasers
1
Thats not what the constitutional provision was intended for. It was intended to give everyone a fighting chance against THE POLICE STATE in the advent a Mad king George the 4'th took over. And to those means, semiauto field-rifles would now have very limited purpose because they can't take down armored gunships on their own, or counter high altitude drones. We've already failed to "keep Parity" with the purpose "2A" because our parents and grandparents allowed too many Arms-Races
1
"Shall not be infringed" is not the same thing as "Shall not be Regulated in any form what so ever". ...repeating a fallacy like that one does not make it a true statement anymore than believing that Mike Pence somehow had MAGICAL powers to overrule every single Elector in all 50 states.
1
...And if you don't agree that regulating arms is already supported by constitutional law, then plz explain why private citizens aren't allowed to own their own tactical nukes?
1
@M42135 That's an "accounting trick" by ATF, CDC, & a couple other 3-letter agencies where in 53% of 'deaths' were pretty much all suicides using hand guns. Assault Rifles are rapidly gaining on them statistically when it comes to intent to kill violence
1
Why you lie to people and suggest the current background checks are effective? (hint: the 'registry' is still in filing cabinets on literal paper with a very limited amount of physical space to document everyone who IS a psychological risk b/c the gun Lobbies wanted it KEPT that way)
1
What if it mostly stemmed from our government's "philosophy" towards "a Monopoly on Violence and Abuse?" ...just saying, because young men tend to absorb the culture around them, and our 'culture' is one of fetishizing nuanced types of militant-economic fascism
1
Less of any item being manufactured and sold, absolutely reduces the overall supply of that item to Grey and Black markets. It may not have the immediate effect that lying democuckolds are all telling everyone it would have, but it would absolutely make them harder to come by for disgruntled edge lords who have no friends and *thus no immediate connections* to easily acquire them.
1
...arguing anything else, is literally arguing against the entire basis of Supply & Demand that all conservatives cling to for free market ideology. ...so just don't do it, okay?
1